63 220. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage and established that this “may include both the suffering and affliction caused to the direct victim his family, the impairment of values that are of great significance for the individual, and also changes, of a non-pecuniary nature, in the living conditions of the victim or his family.”269 said harm must be proved in cases such as this one. has and any The 221. The Court takes into consideration that Mr. Lagos del Campo was declared a victim of the violation of Articles 13, 8, 26, 16 and 25 of the Convention. These violations resulted in evident harm: the victim was diagnosed with the clinical disorder, classified by the ICD-10 [Translator’s note: the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems] as a persistent personality disorder following a traumatic and/or catastrophic experience, following the situation denounced and the prolonged judicial proceedings. 270 Moreover, it has been proved that his dismissal and the violation of his human rights, as well as the impossibility of obtaining justice to date, have been significant sources of stress, anxiety and worry and, with the passage of time, this has affected Mr. Lagos del Campo’s health. 222. As a result of these violations, the Court finds it pertinent to establish, in equity, compensation for non-pecuniary damage of US$20,000 (twenty thousand United States dollars). E. Costs and expenses 223. The representatives explained that Mr. Lagos del Campo incurred expenses in the different judicial proceedings, including when he had recourse to the Commission. Later, he was sponsored by APRODEH. Accordingly, they asked the Court to establish, in equity, an amount for expenses corresponding to Mr. Lagos del Campo, and those corresponding to APRODEH as the victim’s representatives. They also asked to be given the opportunity to present amounts and vouchers for future expenses at the corresponding procedural stage. 271 224. The State argued that vouchers must be submitted in order to obtain reimbursement of costs and expenses. Regarding future expenditure, it indicated that the representative’s request appeared reasonable, but it reserved the right to examine the expenses at the corresponding procedural opportunity. 225. The Court reiterates that, pursuant to its case law,272 costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation, because the efforts made by the victims to obtain justice at both the national and the international level involve disbursements that should be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment. Regarding the reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is for the Court to make a prudent assessment of their scope, which includes the expenses arising before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction and also those incurred in the course of the proceedings before the inter-American system, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction for the protection of human rights. This assessment must be made taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that the quantum is reasonable.273 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, Reparations, supra, para. 84, and Case of Acosta et al. v. Nicaragua, supra, para. 236. 269 270 Expert opinion of Carlos Jibaja Zárate (merits file, f. 463). For future expenses they merely submitted the voucher for the air fare of Christian Huaylinos Camacuari for US$450.11 (merits file, ff. 444.3 to 444.5). 271 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations, supra, para. 42, and Case of Zegarra Marín v. Peru, supra, para. 229. 272 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 82, and Case of Zegarra Marín v. Peru, supra, para. 229. 273